Easter Traditions?

[Tcg]

Are there any Easter Traditions that are related specifically to Jesus' resurrection? The Easter eggs hunts, bunnies and pastel-colored candies seem to be a celebration of spring. Certainly, sermons will be preached on Jesus' resurrection, but are there any Easter Traditions that Christians practice with their families that are focused on Jesus?


Tcg

[TRANSPONDER]

You were ... not saying 'well they had to stay ritually clean for the whole week'

I did not focus on ritual uncleaness because the discussion was not what rendered people ritualistically unclean, but rather, "Can John's account of the events at the end of Jesus life (more particularly the Passover events), be harmonizes with the synoptics"?

That said, obviously in addressing John 18:28, the question was: "For which festival did the Priests wish to remain ritualy clean ?" Back in post #87 I quoted to the Jewish Biblical scholar Alfred Edersheim who wrote ..

"A voluntary peace offering was made on Passover and another, a compulsory one, on the next day, Nisan 15, the first day of the Festival of Unfermented Cakes. It was this second offering that the Jews were afraid they might not be able to eat if they contracted defilement in the judgment hall of Pilate" ” The Temple, 1874, pp. 186, 187

NOTE : Interestingly there is a biblical provision to delay the Sedar meal in case of uncleaness while there is no such provision for the Festival.

I'd have to look at your quote in context as I don' recall seeing any such argument (sorry, I may be excused following up all your links - it's up to you to make your case, not me). This 'second offering' has to be some kind of meal that was 'eaten' or it is no help to your case. This is where i have to ask for a link which for once you don't give.

I'll tell you what though, I'm getting a bit confused about the days. I'm going to have to get back to you on this.

[TRANSPONDER]

Ok I fo0und this quite tricky though others may find it easy.

Wed 13th Nisan all day to evening when the new 'day' starts

Night of 14th Nisan Thursday to dawn
Day of 14th Nisan day of preparation for Passover. Paschal lambs killed (in Temple and possibly elsewhere, though shoket ritual must be correct)
The disciples book the upper room because it seems that Jesus comes that evening.

Evening start of 15th Nisan Friday. Seder Passover eaten (Last supper)
Night of 15th Jesus arrested, interrogated and kept in jail overnight

Dawn of the Passover day Friday 15th when supposedly the Sanhedrin meets (if that's allowed on Passover)
Trial before Pilate.

This is when you say (JW) that there is this 2nd Passover to be eaten which would make sense if one Passover was eaten in the evening before that night and another during the day. In that case John's reference to the day of preparation (on that day) refers only to the Sabbath starting that evening, but not to the Passover since the day of preparation had been the day before.

So it all seems to work, if you can show a credible source for a second Passover meal to be eaten (at least by the Priests) during that day.

Supposing that to be the case, they must have been busy, complaining to Pilate about his 'Charge' jeering at Jesus on the cross, eating this 2nd Passover meal (presumably they missed that 'darkness', rending of temple veil and so on, while nibbling at their 2nd Passover). Having Judas return their money and having to think about getting permission to post a tomb guard.

Evening of course is the Saturday Sabbath 16th Nisan and the Sabbath day to evening of the new Sunday which is when the women can prepare spices and get over their upset so the problem of the closed tomb should strike them before they set out at daybreak.

So it does shake down other than you making this compulsory offering on Passover a 2nd Passover meal to be eaten , at least by the priests. If you can validate that, you win.

[JehovahsWitness]

You were ... not saying 'well they had to stay ritually clean for the whole week'

I did not focus on ritual uncleaness because the discussion was not what rendered people ritualistically unclean, but rather, "Can John's account of the events at the end of Jesus life (more particularly the Passover events), be harmonizes with the synoptics"?

That said, obviously in addressing John 18:28, the question was: "For which festival did the Priests wish to remain ritualy clean ?" Back in post #87 I quoted to the Jewish Biblical scholar Alfred Edersheim who wrote ..

"A voluntary peace offering was made on Passover and another, a compulsory one, on the next day, Nisan 15, the first day of the Festival of Unfermented Cakes. It was this second offering that the Jews were afraid they might not be able to eat if they contracted defilement in the judgment hall of Pilate" ” The Temple, 1874, pp. 186, 187

NOTE : Interestingly there is a biblical provision to delay the Sedar meal in case of uncleaness while there is no such provision for the Festival.

This 'second offering' has to be some kind of meal that was 'eaten' or it is no help to your case. This is where i have to ask for a link which for once you don't give.

The festival didn't incorportae "one" singular offering, there were many. The grain, sin and guilt offerings had portions reserved for the priests to eat. For further information regarding eating during the 7 day festival, please read the full entry of aforementioned post #87

[JehovahsWitness]

Ok I fo0und this quite tricky though others may find it easy.

Wed 13th Nisan all day to evening when the new 'day' starts

I dont agree with your allocation of the days (I believe the deciples prepared the Sedar meal on Thursday daylight hours... not Wednesday) and I dont know what you are talking about when you talk about "a second Passover meal"... but you do seem to have grasped the Jewish day running from sunset to sunset; kudos for that.


JW

[Difflugia]

I'd have to look at your quote in context as I don' recall seeing any such argument (sorry, I may be excused following up all your links - it's up to you to make your case, not me).

The quote in JW context is in the "Passover" entry of Insight into the Scriptures, a JW BIble dictionary.

The source that Insight took it from is a book that is now in the public domain and Internet Archive has good scans. Pages 186-187.

Edersheim's source is a combination of Mishnah Chagigah 1.1, I think Chagigah 1.6 (his footnote numberings don't match, but the subject matter does), and Pesach 6.3.

You can read it yourself, but I don't think it carries the exact implication that Edersheim wants it to. It looks to me like he's trying to combine two different guidelines into something not found in either one.

The first rule is that if the normal day for the Passover meal falls in the middle of the week and there's not enough Paschal lamb for the meal, one may have a "festival peace offering" meal first and then have the smaller, ritual Passover meal immediately afterward. In order for the combination to be valid, the festival peace offering must also be ritually pure.

The second rule is that if one arranges for a festival peace offering, it may be eaten on any day of the festival.

I think Edersheim wants to combine these such that the peace offering may be eaten as a substitute on the actual day of Passover, but then the Passover must be eaten the following evening. The way I read it is that if one wants to have a peace offering as a supplement meal to the Passover Seder, they both have to be on the day when the Seder is normally eaten and they both have to be ritually pure. The peace offering meal doesn't have to be ritually pure to be eaten any other time during the week, but only if it's eaten as a supplement to the Passover Seder.

I think Edersheim has it backwards. If the Passover meal has already been eaten (which it would have been if we're attempting to harmonize with the Synoptics), then there's no requirement to remain pure for a subsequent meal later in the week. If they need to remain pure for the meal, then the time for the Seder hasn't arrived yet and we're in contradiction with the Synoptics.

Incidentally, Edersheim wasn't a "Jewish Bible scholar." Edersheim converted from Judaism to Christianity as a young man, then went on to study theology and become a minister of the Church of Scotland. He had been Jewish early in his life and a Bible scholar late in life, but at no time was he a "Jewish Bible scholar."

[TRANSPONDER]

Ok I fo0und this quite tricky though others may find it easy.

Wed 13th Nisan all day to evening when the new 'day' starts

I dont agree with your allocation of the days (I believe the deciples prepared the Sedar meal on Thursday daylight hours... not Wednesday) and I dont know what you are talking about when you talk about "a second Passover meal"... but you do seem to have grasped the Jewish day running from sunset to sunset; kudos for that.


JW

Jesus man you're the one arguing for a 'second passover' to be eaten, whether you call it a matzzo feast, Ttemple feast, first fruits - it is one the Priests eat after the Seder eaten at the Last supper. I shouldn't have to explain your own apologetics to you.

And the scheme I set out requires that the Seder food was prepared during the day which would make the day of preparation the same day as the day the Passover was eaten in the evening, as if not, the day of preparation has to be the Wednesday 14th Nisan which is the first day of Passover. I said it seemed a bit tricky and maybe Jewish authorities can explain how this all had to work.

[TRANSPONDER]

I'd have to look at your quote in context as I don' recall seeing any such argument (sorry, I may be excused following up all your links - it's up to you to make your case, not me).

The quote in JW context is in the "Passover" entry of Insight into the Scriptures, a JW BIble dictionary.

The source that Insight took it from is a book that is now in the public domain and Internet Archive has good scans. Pages 186-187.

Edersheim's source is a combination of Mishnah Chagigah 1.1, I think Chagigah 1.6 (his footnote numberings don't match, but the subject matter does), and Pesach 6.3.

You can read it yourself, but I don't think it carries the exact implication that Edersheim wants it to. It looks to me like he's trying to combine two different guidelines into something not found in either one.

The first rule is that if the normal day for the Passover meal falls in the middle of the week and there's not enough Paschal lamb for the meal, one may have a "festival peace offering" meal first and then have the smaller, ritual Passover meal immediately afterward. In order for the combination to be valid, the festival peace offering must also be ritually pure.

The second rule is that if one arranges for a festival peace offering, it may be eaten on any day of the festival.

I think Edersheim wants to combine these such that the peace offering may be eaten as a substitute on the actual day of Passover, but then the Passover must be eaten the following evening. The way I read it is that if one wants to have a peace offering as a supplement meal to the Passover Seder, they both have to be on the day when the Seder is normally eaten and they both have to be ritually pure. The peace offering meal doesn't have to be ritually pure to be eaten any other time during the week, but only if it's eaten as a supplement to the Passover Seder.

I think Edersheim has it backwards. If the Passover meal has already been eaten (which it would have been if we're attempting to harmonize with the Synoptics), then there's no requirement to remain pure for a subsequent meal later in the week. If they need to remain pure for the meal, then the time for the Seder hasn't arrived yet and we're in contradiction with the Synoptics.

Incidentally, Edersheim wasn't a "Jewish Bible scholar." Edersheim converted from Judaism to Christianity as a young man, then went on to study theology and become a minister of the Church of Scotland. He had been Jewish early in his life and a Bible scholar late in life, but at no time was he a "Jewish Bible scholar."

Thank you, but I'd still like to know what the Jewish expert wrote and what was reprised by the JW's. They didn't put it in quotes. But Ok if there was a 2nd passover to be eaten after Seder, that will explain John (whether that's what he meant or not). I noticed some translation -shopping of the genetive plural for 'First day' (which i think you may have contested) and which anyway ignores that the gospels say it was the day the lambs were killed and that is the 1st day (day of preparation) whatever mucking up of greek grammer these JW's want to do.

looking up Pesach, I don't see how it helps our Resident JW.

"The peace offering is brought together with the Seder on the 14th (presumably to be eaten on the 15th) . "When, however, the Paschal lamb comes on Shabbat, or when few people are registered for it so that each person will receive a large portion, or when it is brought in a state of ritual impurity, one does not bring a Festival peace-offering with it."

In the Gospels it doesn't fall on Shabbat (except I still think in John it does) so the peace offering is not brought with it. How that makes for a claim that some Passover was eaten some time after the Seder, I don't yet see.

With regard to Chabad "With regard to one who did not celebrate by bringing the Festival peace-offering on the first day of the festival of Sukkot, he may celebrate and bring it during the entire remaining days of the pilgrimage Festival," This seems pretty loose and I don't see the point about Ritual purity, and it relates to the feast of tabernacles anyway.

I'm still not seeing the JW 2nd Passover meal here.I'm not saying this can't be explained but I haven't yet seen the fact support the claim. Like the first day, while it can mean day before, it doesn't alter the fact that the Gospels say the first day means something else. I simply don't trust these people to tell the plain truth.

p,s I know what they are going to say, but it has to be said. Eidersheim was a 19th c convert to Christianity and that could explain why there is the straining to make various loopholes in the Passover turn into what seems a second Seder after the Last Supper to explain why John has a 2nd Passover feast. I had suspicions that the JW's were misrepresenting Eidersheim to make him explain John, but it's quite believable he did it himself. Like i say it has to be said. While he evidently knew his Torah, Authority lapses a bit when he might well be wangling it to fit his new beliefs.

[JehovahsWitness]

...you're the one arguing for a 'second passover' to be eaten, whether you call it a matzzo feast, Ttemple feast, first fruits - it is one the Priests eat after the Seder eaten at the Last supper.

It's not a second Passover (or a second Passover meal) as if the Sedar lamb is eaten twice...it was (at least we can understand in the 1st century) "The passover" which comprised in Jesus day, of a family group based memorial meal followed by one of the three annual festivals. If you use terminology I did not use, and is not bible based, and or applies to later period not under discussion, it should be no surprise I ask for clarification, not for what I mean but for what you think I mean.

In this kind if discussion terminology is important.



JW

[TRANSPONDER]

...you're the one arguing for a 'second passover' to be eaten, whether you call it a matzzo feast, Ttemple feast, first fruits - it is one the Priests eat after the Seder eaten at the Last supper.

It's not a second Passover (or a second Passover meal) as if the Sedar lamb is eaten twice...it was (at least we can understand in the 1st century) "The passover" which comprised in Jesus day, of a family group based memorial meal followed by one of the three annual festivals. If you use terminology I did not use, and is not bible based, and or applies to later period not under discussion, it should be no surprise I ask for clarification, not for what I mean but for what you think I mean.

In this kind if discussion terminology is important.



JW

No. In this discussion understanding the argument is important not semantic fiddling to distract attention from the only point - whether there was a particular feast that the priests had to stay unsullied for after the Seder had been eaten (and we are talking an intervening Night (of the 15th) here before the morning when the Sanhedrin trial was assembled.

I know you have argued for a second feast, and you grabbed my apologetic that it applied to the whole week, and are pointing to this Edersheim - chap as an argument for some particular later feast which I don't see from his evidence.

It isn't a massive contradiction but appealing to the week long feast wouldn't convince me and that it satisfies you doesn't matter. That it still looks like John actually means the Seder still having to be eaten is at least as likely, and for me (bearing in mind many more obvious contradictions) that John is simply contradicting the Synoptics is only too likely.

As to you disagreeing with my chronology, I sweated over that and I can draw you a map again if you want, but in fact it makes no real difference other than to have daylight intervening between the 14th and the 15th evening of the last supper. otherwise it makes no real difference. If you disagree, tell me when the daylight hours of the 15th Nisan fell in the story.

[JehovahsWitness]

It's not a second Passover (or a second Passover meal) as if the Sedar lamb is eaten twice...it was (at least we can understand in the 1st century) "The passover" which comprised in Jesus day, of a family group based memorial meal followed by one of the three annual festivals. If you use terminology I did not use, and is not bible based, and or applies to later period not under discussion, it should be no surprise I ask for clarification, not for what I mean but for what you think I mean.

In this kind if discussion terminology is important.



JW

No. In this discussion understanding the argument is important ...

Yes that is also important ; I have tried to be clear about what I am saying and responded on request for clarification.

... appealing to the week long feast wouldn't convince me ...

I dont recall voicing that as one of my concerns.

JW